Unify Classic and RP Sec accesses

[JORJ949]

I heavily dislike how RP and classic have different access levels for the HoS and Security officers, it would be much nicer if they were the same.
In particular RP officer has many accesses that the classic HoS doesn't, below is a spreadsheet showing the differences between the roles/servers and my proposed changes (some accesses left out like armory because there was no need to include them).


While not an RP player myself I have seen many RP players say that RP officers have too much access, and removing these accesses give additional chances for roleplay rather than the officer just walking into the room you are in they have to RP your surrender or get the ai to open it, giving time to RP, or getaway.

My general argument for giving HoS more access is to make them like the RP officer but unlike RP officers they cant be everywhere at once, also they have ID comp so can just give themselves an access if they need it.

I think a better solution to giving them HoP access would just make sure every map's hopdesk is accessible by the HoS, why have ID computer if you dont have access TO the ID computer, the same applies to the Ruck kit / mechanics.

[Lord_earthfire]

To be honest, i feel RP sec could just get the classic sec access and it would be fine.

The access of sec on RP is a serious problem on mid pop, where you have 7+ security and maybe 3-4 antags, because it leaves little to no escape routes and breathing space for the already too low amount of antags.

The reasoning for RP sec access was mostly lowpop RP. Given the captain is nowadays effectively a sec-member with AA and ability to hand out access to secoffs, i don't think that reasoning is valid anymore.

[Emimiyu]

We have had discussion about this and a lot of people seems to not be a fan of cutting out RP secoff access. Me personally (I play secoff on roleplay) would rather RP secoff get less access, but idk if most RP sec players want it. Though some people agree that HoS access on RP maybe too excessive? It's not like they can't just modify their ID and I do think accessing other heads' quarter is not necessary access at all. Though, I can't open the image to see the comparisson for HoS access.. I thought they had almost AA minus head quarters

Also, a lot of people think classic secoff has a very limited access (nope they are not, they can generally access medbay, botany, and chemistry), but I do not think it is a big difference. Except that classic secoff get no access at all to engineering. I feel like they should have general access to engineering.

Anyway, conclussion to the two paragraph I wrote, i think it's better and less controversial to make HoS access on RP and classic the same (give more to hos on classic, cut some from hos on RP). Then add "general engineering" access for classic secoff, because that's the huge different between two access. Cutting RP secoff access directly would be too controversial. Also, RP secoff abusing their access feels more like a player issue that should have been ahelped especially when we have stay in your lane rules.

Edit : addition to this, people probably would want unifying HoS access, but not much on secoff access

[LeahTheTech]

I broadly support this, although I think HoS doesn't need quite that much access. ID computer for example is covered by having a departmental ID computer in their office that they can use to demote/promote people with. It also looks very artificial that they don't have QM console access when you're giving them pseudo-AA like that.

[JORJ949]

I broadly support this, although I think HoS doesn't need quite that much access. ID computer for example is covered by having a departmental ID computer in their office that they can use to demote/promote people with. It also looks very artificial that they don't have QM console access when you're giving them pseudo-AA like that.

I myself like the HoS having ID computer access in case the cap/hop is missing and they need to demote someone (including the HoP). So if that was removed id like to see the sec one gain the ability to control "critical" accesses from command, like AI upload and ID computer for example.

EDIT: Nevermind I think this is fine just confiscate IDs you cant change until you get someone to change em

---

I think the following accesses are fine to remove from hos: Artlab, Robot depot, HoP office, ID comp, Engi power (APC), Engi atmos, Mining outpost

[Kotlol]

I am fine with this, but I will warn you... there will be a lot of sec officers going to the HoP to ask for more access since "That's how it used to be" transitional phaze.

[JOELED]

I support this, I think lessening RP sec access would be really good.

[Cal]

Not in favor of putting the stress of opening doors and shit on HoS, I still want HoS to be able to play the game and have fun.

[klushy225]

I feel like this will just lead to, as cal said, the HoS having to open doors for people. That, and officers begging for AA constantly.

[alexandregtg]

We've had this same discussion a lot of times before. It even got PR'd one time. I'm personally not a fan of restricting Security's access on RP more.

https://forum.ss13.co/showthread.php?tid...ght=access

https://forum.ss13.co/showthread.php?tid=21885&page=4

[Decarcassor]

I broadly support this, although I think HoS doesn't need quite that much access. ID computer for example is covered by having a departmental ID computer in their office that they can use to demote/promote people with. It also looks very artificial that they don't have QM console access when you're giving them pseudo-AA like that.

I'm kind of the mind on HoS access it should be largely the same as security members + bridge and maybe a few extra things that make sense like QM. You've got the AI and silicons, the captain and HoP to involve. But also the other department heads and in desperate case regular crewmembers who happen to work in the place crime is happening. Would it be so terrible ?

[Wander]

I sincerely do not believe this would really improve the conditions on the rp servers at all.

The simplest way to put it is: classic and rp are fundamentally different. Trying to apply the same practices to both, specifically in this avenue, is sort of ignoring those differences entirely for little to no benefit on the player’s side.
Secoffs on rp unlike those on classic are required to spend time interacting with people and reacting in a proportional manner to the threats they encounter which naturally takes up more of their time if this time was spent having to go through bureaucracy just to go through doors then this would just be unfun for all involved. There is also an expectation set on them to not go around hacking doors or carrying around a bunch of tools unless necessary for a situation. Officers on classic can carry whatever they want with far less eyebrow raising and hack open a door as they see fit or just handle antags however they need as they do not have these restrictions, so the lesser access works for them. Opening doors or begging for access additionally is not “good rp”, it is a frustrating arbitrary time sink that disproportionately affects newer sec players and the officers who do not immediately go for hacking tools. Easiest way to exemplify this is by posing the question “How much RP do AI’s get from door open requests?” answer being, not a lot.

I also agree with the three posts above in that this would also just put a bunch of random pressure on HoSii who barely get time to enjoy the game as is between managing the chaos and that this is a power lich of a horse that keeps rising from the grave to get beat once again.

To summarize, we should not cut the allocated antag-sec rp timeblock down to replace a portion of it with a “door rp” timeblock otherwise antag-sec interactions would just get worse as a result of being constantly rushed .

[LeahTheTech]

I don't see how this would make antag-sec interactions more rushed. I'd argue that a vampire being infinitely chased all around the station with very little opportunity to end the chase is significantly worse for RP because everyone ends up frustrated and you often see security pushing to execute an antag just because of how long the chase was.

[Wander]

It really depends on what your definition of a “chase” is if you mean it’d let antags like arcfiends completely ditch security in singular runs more, that’d be correct. This would also though just create a lot more smaller chases that would together be longer than the pre-change single chase which is why I think it’d take up more time and lead to a lot more rushed interactions once these chase sagas end. Catching certain antags would become so hard for them they’d just have to execute on first offense for anything too violent or guarantee being constantly swamped.

[Petey]

I'm not necessarily for or against a change like this, but is there any harm in running the change on RP for a week or two, gather reception, and revert the change if it doesn't vibe well? Otherwise we'll be sitting here speculating scenarios without any real evidence to suggest what would happen.